Re: MythBusters Viewer Challenge!

Safety belt myths and Tory myth ...

one thing that I've thought of later on; is this "myth": That it is possible to make something with such a huge area and drag coefficient, but with so little mass, that the object will NOT fall (i.e., extremely slowly) due to the air resistance. (Newton's first law) formula for terminal velocity: V(t)=sqrt(2mg/ρACd).
2g~19.6133. ρ(0m)=1.2250kg/m³. ρ(11 000m)=0.36391kg/m³. ρ(20 000m)=0.08803kg/m³ (for air). metals or composit/metal to be used: Silica nanofoam (1.9mg/cm³), Lithium (534mg/cm³)(or any Alkali or Alkaline earth metals)

source: wikipedia

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• mythbusters
• viewer
• challenge
• adam
• jamie
• discovery
• channel
• buster
• kari
• byron
• grant
• imahara
• tori
• belleci
• safety
• seat
• belt

[sgbr101]

pretty awsome myths man

[yvve1]

Do you really think so?

heh ... Sorry for being sceptical, but I personally don't think that tey're that good.

but again: If you meant it, thanks!

[askaviationguy]

well I think they should go for the 3d one! sounds like it would be interesting and only one person at least would be opposing it!

[yvve1]

Yeah; I know ...

I got the idea from Katie Tiedrich though, but I like the consept of the myth.

[timtim529]

the "myht in the description is more then true, they have made lighter then air solids so that a solid will actually fly and float up, no falling at all, its called SEAgel.

[14080yo]

.....morbid.....

[yvve1]

"That these engineering failures were largely due to fire & not Controlled Demolition?"

I'm sorry; not following you; was that a question?

[WarCrime911]

The collapse of WTC 1, 2, & Building 7 on 9/11 were the 3 largest structural engineering failures in History. Normally in a situation like this they would collect, catalogue, and examine all of the evidence to find out what went wrong. In the case of 9/11 the exact opposite was done, they destroyed all of the evidence almost immediately. What evidence is left drastically contradicts the Official Theory. That these engineering failures were largely due to fire & not Controlled Demolition?

[yvve1]

Since you're saying that the authorities always lies; I expect you do not believe in the explanation of 9/11?

And in which way do they not follow the scientific method of testing? (Ok, sometimes they don't. But from where I see it; that's a rarity